Trump praises SCOTUS for disabling Democrats' biggest weapon

President Donald Trump held a press conference Friday to celebrate the latest victory handed down by the Supreme Court that could stop the weaponization of federal courts.

After SCOTUS upheld a ban on state Medicaid funding going to Planned Parenthood and also ruled that parents are entitled to a preliminary injunction to have children excused from LGBT in-school lessons, it seemed hard to imagine that more impactful legal victories would come down the pike.

‘The Supreme Court has delivered a monumental victory for the Constitution, the separation of powers, and the rule of law.’

In a 6-3 ruling, however, the Supreme Court was split down ideological lines when it ruled that the president’s executive orders could no longer be delayed for months or possibly years on end upon the whim of one individual.

The decision in Trump v. CASA, Inc. seemingly put to bed the ability of a single federal judge to grant a nationwide injunction on an executive order, the Democrats’ most powerful tool of law in recent years.

“The injunctions before us today reflect a more recent development: district courts asserting the power to prohibit enforcement of a law or policy against anyone,” Justice Amy Coney Barrett wrote for the majority.

Justice Barrett added that “these injunctions — known as ‘universal injunctions’ — likely exceed the equitable authority that Congress has granted to federal courts.”

President Trump held a press conference at the White House in celebration, where he called the decision a “monumental victory for the Constitution, the separation of powers, and the rule of law.”

RELATED: Supreme Court upholds ban on Medicaid funds for Planned Parenthood

Trump remarked that SCOTUS has effectively struck down the “excessive use of nationwide injunctions” that he said interfere with the normal functions of the executive branch.

Indeed, the injunctions had become an often-used tactic by judges appointed by Joe Biden and other Democrat presidents, even in recent weeks.

Just two weeks prior to the SCOTUS decision, a judge blocked the deportation of a Palestinian activist, while just last week another Biden appointee prevented requirements that passports accurately reflect the holders’ sex.

“It was a grave threat to democracy, frankly,” Trump continued. “And instead of merely ruling on the immediate cases before them, these judges have attempted to dictate the law for the entire nation.”

The president explained to reporters that in practice, all it took was an injunction from any one of the nearly 700 federal judges to stop the policy of the executive branch.

Attorney General Pam Bondi further illustrated how often the liberal judges were exercising this power.

RELATED: MASSIVE VICTORY: SCOTUS sides with parents; Alito nukes LGBT indoctrination campaign

Bondi revealed that out of 94 federal judicial districts, just five of the districts accounted for 88% of the nationwide injunctions.

“Think about that,” Bondi told the press room. “Ninety-four districts, and 35 out of the 40 opinions with nationwide injunctions came from five liberal districts in this country. No longer. No longer.”

The president stressed the ability to work very quickly with his administration and thanked the conservative judges for seemingly allowing him the ability to do so. He then wasted no time in announcing which cases his legal team would be pursuing, and he immediately pointed to “ending birthright citizenship.”

Birthright citizenship was “meant for the babies of slaves” Trump stated from the podium, not for “people trying to scam the system and come into the country on a vacation.”

“It was meant for the babies of slaves, and it’s so clean and so obvious. … Hundreds of thousands of people are pouring into our country under birthright citizenship, and it wasn’t meant for that reason.”

While SCOTUS did not determine whether Trump’s executive order to rescind birthright citizenship was constitutional, the severe limitations on injunctions likely mean the order could go into effect in the interim, until a final ruling by the high court.